JEM leader rejects separate talks on Darfur with other rebels

February 25, 2010 (PARIS) — Khalil Ibrahim the leader of the rebel Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) rejected today the idea of separate talks between the government and another rebel group formed yesterday, threatening to withdraw from Doha.

Sudanese officials announced yesterday following the signing of framework agreement between the Government of Sudan and JEM they would hold separate negotiations with the Liberation Movement for Justice (LMJ), formed from ten rebel factions who had rejected to merge with Justice and equality Movement.

"The two groups JEM and LMJ would not accept unity; so there will be separate negotiation with them only unless they agree to unite at any stage of talks and this may be determined by mediation. The negotiations may end by one document or two documents. But we are seeking to reach one document accepted by all the parties," Ghazi said today morning following his arrival to Khartoum from Doha.

"We do not accept having more than one venue for peace talks, in one issue, and with one mediation. This is unacceptable," said Khalil Ibrahim in an interview with Radio Dabanga to be aired on Thursday.

The rebel leader added he proposed to the 10 factions and still wants to merge with them in one movement before to negotiate with the government. "We want a unity with no winners or losers," he stressed.

The members of the rebel LMJ declined last week JEM’s offer for merger saying they prefer only to have separate delegations coordinating with each other during the talks.

He said these groups have no political or military grounds. He also accused them of doing "business with the cause of Darfur people".

Khalil further spoke about Tijani El-Sissi who is designated by the new rebel group as top negotiator, saying he had never been involved in the armed struggle for Darfur people since 2003 and now he is imposed to negotiate on their behalf.

El-Sissi is a former governor of Darfur, from the largest ethnic group in the region, Fur tribe. He was also member in the Umma Party of Sadig Al-Mahdi. He was approached since last year by the Libyan government to head the rebel factions they gathered in Tripoli.

(ST)

Comments on the Sudan Tribune website must abide by the following rules. Contravention of these rules will lead to the user losing their Sudan Tribune account with immediate effect.

- No inciting violence
- No inappropriate or offensive language
- No racism, tribalism or sectarianism
- No inappropriate or derogatory remarks
- No deviation from the topic of the article
- No advertising, spamming or links
- No incomprehensible comments

Due to the unprecedented amount of racist and offensive language on the site, Sudan Tribune tries to vet all comments on the site.

There is now also a limit of 400 words per comment. If you want to express yourself in more detail than this allows, please e-mail your comment as an article to comment@sudantribune.com

Kind regards,

The Sudan Tribune editorial team.

25 February 2010 07:18, by David_N

El-Sissi is the one whom can represent Darfur, because he is from Fur tribe and not Khalil Ibrahim of Zaghawa tribe.
The Darfur supporsed to run by Fur ethnic minority!

Like Dinka are suppose to run South Sudan ! ha ha ha ha
David its these ethnic divides that all Sudanese have (not just the North) that has made Sudan into a tribal and ethnic state since its independence.

JEM leader and the rest doesn’t want peace in darfur, its happens always when the clever is among the fool, he/she can fool them. If El-Sissi could not really reason how is people are dying ,then he might be a fool.
On the other hand, am belaming the International communities.Why? they would have taken their own dicision on Darfur problem.

This agreement is not going to bring real peace to Darfuri. This is just a lipstick on the Sudan national elections and 2011 referendum and the ICC arrest warrant.
South Sudan went through the same process from 1972( Abel Alier Addis Ababa agreement), 1997 (Riak Machar Khartoum agreement) and 2005 (John Garang-Nifasha CPA which is not yet been implemented fully).

Why did i say it is not a real peace agreement? Because this kind of peace agreement is exactly like DR. Lam Akol ( Fashoda agreement), Arok Thon Arok and Dr. Riak Machar’s Khartoum peace agreement of 1997.

It will never bear any fruit of peace such as security; development, roads, schools, economic prosperity and respect for human rights.

This agreement will weaken the Darfuri movement for sometime as the so called Khartoum peace agreement weaken SPLA/M for a short period of time before the real peace (CPA) agreement was signed in 2005.

JEM leaders will be like Riak Machar, Paulino Matip, and Lam Akol later when the real Darfuri CPA is signed.

This agreement is a prayer on the judgment day, it is too late, Omaaar Hosaan will never escape the ICC arrest warrant or win national elections no matter what the US, Canada, France and UN said.

However, the real Darfuri CPA will be signed after 2011 Referendum when Darfuri movements are united as one movement and supported by the Republic of New Sudan (RONS).

The South- North CPA was negotiated for 2 years. This JEM and NCP agreement is only negotiated for 2 weeks like Dr. Riak Machar’s Khartoum peace. JEM will be back to Darfur soon or NCP will kill JEM leader like Dr. John Garang.

Thank God for Salva Kiir, CPA would have been dishonored long time ago by the NCP. Darfuri should ask themselves this question. Who will lead JEM ,if Khalil Ibrahim is assassinated?

This peace agreement is so cheap and can be dishonored within 2 weeks only.

The same UN members who welcomes Omaar Hosaan moved will condemn the NCP tomorrow when OMaar changed his mind and goes back to war aginst Darfuri.

Let’s watch this old movie of the NCP’s deceptive peace agreement policy to buy time from Southerners, Darfuri, UN, US, AU and EU.

As long as this NCP policy of signing a peace and not implementing it deceives both the West and Sudanese; we will continue to see many peace agreements signed by NCP.

This is their last policy of survival. They can not afford to fight SPLA and JEM simultaneously.

Holding accountable those enabling genocide in Sudan2016-12-05 05:30:49
Eric Reeves
As grim genocide by attrition in Darfur is set to enter its fifteenth year, as Khartoum’s claim of a purely nominal “cease-fire” in South Kordofan is belied by repeated reports of Sudan (...)